Church Government

VIEW:13 DATA:01-04-2020

CHURCH GOVERNMENT.—1. The general development seems fairly clear, though its later stages fall beyond NT times. The Apostles were founders of churches, and therefore regulated and supervised the first arrangements; then were added sundry local and unlocal rulers; then the unlocal died out, and the local settled down into the three permanent classes of bishops, elders, and deacons. The chief disputed questions concern the origin of the local ministry, its relation to the other, and the time and manner in which it settled down under the government of (monarchical) bishops.
2. Twice over St. Paul gives something like a list of the chief persons of the Church. In 1Co_12:28 he counts up—‘first, apostles; second, prophets; third, teachers; then powers; then gifts of healing, helps, governments, kinds of tongues.’ It will be noticed that all the words after the first two plainly describe functions, not offices. A few years later (Eph_4:11) he tells us how the ascended Lord ‘himself gave some as apostles, some prophets, some evangelists, some pastors and teachers, for the work of service’ (diakonia)—they are all of them ‘deacons’ (diakonoi), whatever more they may be.
3. At the head of both lists is the Apostle. The Apostles were not limited to the Eleven, or to the number twelve, though twelve was always the ideal number (1Co_15:5, Rev_21:14; perhaps Act_2:14; Act_6:2). Whether Matthias remained an Apostle or not, Paul and Barnabas were certainly Apostles (e.g. Act_14:14), and so was James the Lord’s brother (Gal_1:19). The old disciples Andronicus and Junias (not Junia) were ‘notable’ Apostles (Rom_16:7). On the other hand, Timothy seems excluded by the greetings of several Epistles (e.g. 2 Co.), and Apollos by the evidence of Clement of Rome, who most likely knew the truth of the matter.
The Apostle’s first qualification was to have seen the risen Lord (Act_1:22, 1Co_9:5), for his first duty was to bear witness of the Resurrection. This qualification seems never to have been relaxed in NT times. A direct call was also needed, for (1Co_12:28, Gal_1:1, Eph_4:11) no human authority could choose an Apostle. The call of Barnabas and Saul was acknowledged (Act_13:8) by a commission from the church at Antioch; and if Matthias remained an Apostle, we must suppose that the direct call was represented by some later Divine recognition.
Therefore the Apostle was in no sense a local official. His work was not to serve tables, but to preach and to make disciples of all nations, so that he led a wandering life, settling down only in his old age, or in the sense of making, say, Ephesus or Corinth his centre for a while. The stories which divide the world among the Twelve are legends: the only division we know of was made (Gal_2:8) at the Conference, when it was resolved that the Three should go to the Jews, Paul and Barnabas to the Gentiles. With this preaching went the founding and general care of churches, though not their ordinary government. St. Paul interferes only in cases of gross error or corporate disorder. His point is not that the Galatians are mistaken, but that they are altogether falling away from Christ; not that the Corinthian is a bad offender, but that the church sees no great harm in the matter. He does not advise the Corinthians on further questions without plain hints (1Co_6:5; 1Co_10:14; 1Co_11:14) that they ought to have settled most of them for themselves.
4. Next to the Apostle comes the shadowy figure of the Prophet. He too sustained the Church, and shared with him (Eph_2:20; Eph_3:5) the revelation of the mystery. He spoke ‘in the spirit’ words of warning, of comfort, or it might be of prediction. He too received his commission from God and not from men, and was no local officer of a church, even if he dwelt in the city. But he was not an eye-witness of the risen Lord, and ‘the care of all the churches’ did not rest on him. Women also might prophesy (1Co_11:5), like Philip’s daughters (Act_21:9) at Cæsarea, or perhaps the mystic Jezebel (Rev_2:20) at Thyatira. Yet even in the Apostolic age prophecy (1Th_5:20) is beginning to fall into discredit, and false prophets are flourishing (1 John, 2 Peter, Jude). This may be the reason for the marked avoidance of the name ‘Apostle’ by and of St. John.
5. It will be seen that St. Paul’s lists leave no place for a local ministry of office, unless it comes in under ‘helps and governments’ on ‘pastors and teachers.’ Yet such a ministry must have existed almost from the first. We have (1) the appointment of the Seven at Jerusalem (Act_6:1-15); (2) elders at Jerusalem in the years 44, 50, 58 (Act_11:30; Act_15:8; Act_15:22; Act_21:18), appointed by Paul and Barnabas in every church about 48 (Act_14:23), mentioned Jam_5:14; at Ephesus in 58 (Act_20:17), mentioned 1Pe_5:1; (3) Phœhe a deaconess at Cenchreæ in 58 (Rom_16:1), bishops and deacons at Philippi in 63 (Php_1:1). Also in the Pastoral Epistles, Timothy at Ephesus about 66 is (1Ti_3:1-16; 1Ti_4:1-16) in charge of four orders: (1) bishops (or elders) (1Ti_5:1); (2) deacons; (3) deaconesses (1Ti_3:11) (‘women’ [in Gr. without the article] cannot be wives of deacons); (4) widows. With Titus in Crete only bishops are mentioned (Tit_1:5). To these we add (5) the prominent quasi-episcopal positions of James at Jerusalem in 44 (Act_12:17), in 50, and in 58; and (6) of Timothy and Titus at Ephesus and in Crete.
To these we must not add (1) the ‘young men’ (neôteroi) who carried out Ananias (Act_5:6). [The tacit contrast with presbyteroi is of age, not office, for it is neaniskoi who bury Sapphira]; (2) the indefinite proistamenoi of 1Th_5:12 and Rom_12:8, and the equally indefinite hçgoumenoi of some unknown church shortly before 70 (Heb_13:7; Heb_13:17). [If these are officials, we can say no more than that there are several of them]; (3) the angels of the seven churches in Asia. [These cannot safely be taken literally.]
6. The questions before us may be conveniently grouped round the three later offices of Bishop, Elder, and Deacon. But bishop and deacon seem at first to have denoted functions of oversight and service rather than definite offices. The elder carries over a more official character from the synagogue; but in any case there is always a good deal of give and take among officials of small societies. If so, we shall not be surprised if we find neither definite institution of offices nor sharp distinction of duties.
(1) Deacons. The traditional view, that the choice of the Seven in Act_6:1-15 marks the institution of a permanent order of deacons, is open to serious doubt. The opinion of Cyprian and later writers is not worth much on a question of this kind, and even that of Irenæus is far from decisive. The vague word diakonia (used too in the context of the Apostles themselves) is balanced by the avoidance of the word ‘deacon’ in the Acts (e.g. Act_21:8 Philip the evangelist, one of the Seven). Since, however, Phœbe was a deaconess at Cenchreæ in 58, there were probably deacons there and at Corinth, though St. Paul does not mention any; and at Philippi we have bishops and deacons in 63. In both cases, however, the doubt remains, how far the name has settled into a definite office. See art. Deacon.
(2) Elders. Elders at Jerusalem receive the offerings in 44 from Saul and Barnabas. They are joined with the Apostles at the Conference in 50, and with James in 58. As Paul and Barnabas appoint elders in every city on their first missionary journey, and we find elders at Ephesus in 58, we may infer that the churches generally had elders, though there is no further certain mention of them till the Pastoral Epistles and 1Peter . Probably Jam_5:12 is earlier, but there we cannot be sure that the word is official.
The difference of name between elders and bishops may point to some difference of origin or duties; but in NT (and in Clement of Rome) the terms are practically equivalent. Thus the elders of Ephesus are reminded (Act_20:28) that they are bishops. In the Pastoral Epistles, Timothy appoints ‘bishops and deacons’; Titus, ‘elders and deacons,’ though Timothy also (1Ti_5:17) has elders under him. The qualifications of the elder, as described to Titus, are practically those of the bishop as given to Timothy, and it is added (Tit_1:7) that the elders must be such ‘because the bishop must be blameless,’ etc.—which is decisive that the bishop’s office was at least as wide as the elder’s. Moreover, in both cases the duties implied are ministerial, not what we call episcopal. If the elder’s duty is to rule (1Ti_5:17), he does it subject to Timothy, much as a modern elder rules subject to his bishop.
(3) Bishops. See Bishop.
H. M. Gwatkin.
Hastings' Dictionary of the Bible
Edited by James Hastings, D.D. Published in 1909

guv?ẽrn-ment:
I. Approach to the Subject
1. The General Sense
2. The Local Sense
II. Internal Order
1. Subjects of Admission
2. Definite Organizations
3. Ministers
(1) General
(2) Local
4. Ecclesiastical Functions
(1) Control of Membership
(2) Selection of Officers, etc.
(3) Observations of Ordinances
5. Independent (Autonomous) Organizations
III. External Authority
IV. Cooperative Relations
Literature
The object here sought is to discover what kind of church government is mirrored in the New Testament. To do this with perfect definiteness is, no doubt, quite impossible. Certain general features, however, may clearly be seen.
I. Approach to the Subject
The subject is best approached through the Greek word ekklēsia, translated ?church.? Passing by the history of this word, and its connection with the Hebrew words ‛ēdhāh and ḳāhāl (which the Septuagint sometimes renders by ἐκκλησία, ekklēsı́a), we come at once to the New Testament usage. Two perfectly distinct senses are found, namely, a general and a local.
1. The General Sense
Christ is ?head over all things to the church, which is his body ....? (Eph_1:22); ?the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are enrolled in heaven? (Heb_12:23). Here we have ?church? in the broadest sense, including all the redeemed in earth and heaven, and in all ages (see also Eph_1:22; Eph_3:10; Eph_5:22-27; Col_1:24; Heb_12:23).
2. The Local Sense
Here the Scripture passages are very numerous. In some cases, the word is used in the singular, and in others the plural; in some it is used with reference to a specified church, and in others without such specification. In all cases the sense is local.
In Act_11:26, it is said that Paul and Barnabas were ?gathered together with the church,? where the church at Antioch is meant. In Act_14:23, Paul and Barnabas are said to have ?appointed elders in every church,? that is, churches which they had planted. In Rev 2 and 3 the seven churches of Asia Minor are addressed. In Act_16:5 we are told that the churches ?were strengthened in the faith.? On the local sense see, further, Act_8:1; Act_15:4; Act_16:5; Act_20:17; Rom_16:4; 1 Cor 12; 1Co_6:4; 1Co_11:16; Gal_1:2, Gal_1:22, and many other places.
There are a few passages that do not seem exactly to fit into either of the above categories. Such, for example, are Mat_18:17 and 1Co_12:28, where it seems best to understand a generic sense. Such, also, are passages like Act_9:31, and 1Co_10:32, where a collective sense best suits the cases.
Church government in the New Testament applies only to the local bodies.
II. Internal Order
With respect to the constitution and life of these New Testament churches, several points may be made out beyond reasonable doubt.
1. Subjects of Admission
They were composed of persons who professed faith in Christ, and who were believed to have been regenerated, and who had been baptized. See Act_2:41, Act_2:44, Act_2:47 (the Revised Version (British and American) ?added to them?); Act_8:12; Rom_1:8; Rom_6:4; Rom_10:9, Rom_10:10; 1Co_1:2; Col_1:2, Col_1:4; 1Ti_6:12, and others, where they are called ?saints,? ?sons of God,? ?faithful brethren,? ?sanctified in Christ Jesus.?
2. Definite Organizations
They are definitely and permanently organized bodies, and not temporary and loose aggregations of individuals. It is quite impossible, for example, to regard the church at Antioch as a loose aggregation of people for a passing purpose. The letters of Paul to the churches at Rome, Corinth, Philippi, Thessalonica, cannot be regarded as addressed to other than permanent and definitely organized bodies.
3. Ministers
They were served by two classes of ministers - one general, the other local.
(1) General
At the head of these is the ?apostle? (1Co_12:28; Eph_4:11). His official relation to the churches was general. He did not necessarily belong to the group of the original Eleven. Besides Matthias (Act_1:26), Paul and Barnabas (1Co_9:5, 1Co_9:6), James, the Lord's brother (Gal_1:19), Andronicus and Junias (Rom_16:7) are reckoned as ?apostles.? The one invariable and necessary qualification of an apostle was that he should have seen the Lord after the Resurrection (Act_1:22; 1Co_9:1). Another qualification was to have wrought ?the signs of an apostle? (2Co_12:12; compare 1Co_9:2). He was to bear witness to what he had seen and heard, to preach the gospel of the kingdom (Act_1:8; 1Co_1:17), to found churches and have a general care of them (2Co_11:28). From the nature of his chief qualification, his office was temporary.
Next comes the ?prophet.? His relation to the churches, also, was general. It was not necessary that he should have seen the Lord, but it appertained to his spiritual function that he should have revelations (Eph_3:5). There is no indication that his office was in any sense administrative.
After the ?prophet? come the ?evangelist? and ?teacher,? the first, a traveling preacher, the second, one who had special aptitude for giving instruction.
After the ?teacher? and ?evangelist? follow a group of special gifts of ?healing,? ?helps,? ?governments,? ?tongues.? It may be that ?helps? and ?governments? are to be identified with ?deacons? and ?bishops,? to be spoken of later. The other items in this part of Paul's list seem to refer to special charismata.
(2) Local
There were two clearly distinct offices of a local and permanent kind in the New Testament churches. Paul (Phi_1:1) addresses ?all the saints in Christ Jesus that are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons.? See BISHOP; DEACON.
The most common designation of the first of these officers is ?elder? (πρεσβύτερος, presbúteros). In one passage (Eph_4:11) he is called ?pastor? (ποιμήν, poimḗn). In Act_20:17-28, it becomes clear that the office of elder, bishop, and pastor was one; for there the apostle charges the elders of the church at Ephesus to feed (pastor) the church in which the Holy Spirit has made them bishops (compare Tit_1:5, Tit_1:7; 1Pe_5:1, 1Pe_5:2).
The function of the elders was, in general, spiritual, but involved an oversight of all the affairs of the church (1Ti_3:2; 1Ti_5:17).
As to the second of the local church officers, it has to be said that little is given us in the New Testament. That the office of deacon originated with the appointment of the Seven in Act_6:1-15 is not certain. If we compare the qualifications there given by the apostles with those given by Paul in 1Ti_3:8-13, it seems quite probable that the necessity which arose at Jerusalem, and which led to the appointment of the Seven was really the occasion for originating the office of deacon in the churches. The work assigned the Seven was secular, that is to say, the ?service of tables.? They were to relieve the apostles of that part of the work. A similar relation to the work of the elders seems to have been borne by that of the deacons.
Again, they exercised the highest ecclesiastical functions.
4. Ecclesiastical Functions
(1) Control of Membership
In Mat_18:17, our Lord, by anticipation, lodges final action, in the sphere of church discipline, with the church. When the church has taken action, the matter is ended. There is no direction to take it to a higher court. In the church at Corinth, there was a man who was guilty of an infamous offense against purity. With regard to the case, Paul urged the most summary discipline (1Co_5:5). If the church should act upon the judgment which he communicated to them, they would act when ?gathered together?; that is to say, action would be taken in conference of the church. In 2 Cor 2, a reference to the case shows that they had acted upon his advice, and that the action was taken by the majority (?the many,? the more, 2Co_2:6). In 2 Cor 2 he counsels restoration of this excluded member now repentant. Exclusion and restoration of members were to be effected by a church. This, of course, carried with it the reception of members in the first instance.
(2) Selection of Officers, Etc
This was true in case of the Seven (Act_6:3-13; see other cases in Act_15:22; 1Co_16:3; 2Co_8:1; Phi_2:25). Act_14:23 and Tit_1:5 seem, at first, to offset the passages just given. In one of these, Paul and Barnabas are said to have ?appointed? (χειροτονήσαντες, cheirotonḗsantes) elders in the churches which they had planted. But scholars of first quality, though themselves adhering to Presbyterial or Episcopal forms of church government, maintain that Paul and Barnabas ordained the elders whom the churches selected - that they ?appointed? them in the usual way, by the suffrages of the members of the churches concerned. The word rendered ?appoint? in Tit_1:5 (καταστήσῃς, katastḗsēs) is more easily understood as referring to ordination instead of selection.
(3) Observation of Ordinances
Paul gives direction (1Co_11:20-34) to the church at Corinth about the observance of the Lord's Supper. These directions are given, not to any officer or set of officers, but to the church. Ecclesiastically, of course, the two ordinances are on the same level; and, if one of them had been committed to the custody, so to say, of the churches, so must the other.
5. Independent (Autonomous) Organizations
The management of their business was in their own hands. Paul wrote the church at Corinth: ?Let all things be done decently and in order? (1Co_14:40). In that comprehensive injunction, given to a church, is implied control of its affairs by the church.
III. External Authority
The investigation up to this point places us in position to see that there is in the New Testament no warrant for ecclesiastical grades in the ministry of the churches, by which there may be created an ascending series of rulers who shall govern the churches merged into one vast ecclesiastical organization called ?the church.? So, also, we are in position to see that there is no warrant for an ascending series of courts which may review any ?case? that originates in a local church. We may see, on the contrary, that to each local church has been committed by Christ the management of its own affairs; and that He had endowed every such church with ecclesiastical competency to perform every function that any ecclesiastical body has a right to perform.
As the churches are not to be dominated by any external ecclesiastical authority, so they are not to be interfered with, in their church life, by civil government. Jesus taught that Christians should be good citizens (Mat_22:15-22); so did the apostles (Rom_13:1-7; 1Pe_2:13-16). Jesus also taught the spirituality of His Kingdom: ?My kingdom is not of this world? (Joh_18:36). It follows that only where the life of a church touched the civic life of the community has the civil authority any right to interfere.
IV. Cooperative Relations
While each local church, according to the New Testament, is independent of every other in the sense that no other has jurisdiction over it, yet co?perative relations were entered into by New Testament churches. Examples and indications of that may be found in Rom_15:26, Rom_15:27; 2 Cor 8; 2Co_9:1-15; Gal_2:10; Rom_15:1; 3Jo_1:8. The principle of co?peration effective in those cases is susceptible of indefinite expansion. Churches may properly co?perate in matters of discipline, by seeking and giving counsel, and by respecting each other's disciplinary measures. In the great, paramount business of evangelizing and teaching the nations, they may co?perate in a multitude of ways. There is no sphere of general Christian activity in which the churches may not voluntarily and freely co?perate for the betterment of the world, the salvation of humanity.
For other standpoints see BISHOP; GOVERNMENT; MINISTRY, etc.
Literature
Hort, The Christian Ecclesia; Hatch, Organization of the Early Christian Churches; Whitley, Church, Ministry and Sacraments in the New Testament; Lindsay, The Church and the Ministry in the Early Cents.; French, Synonyms of New Testament; Vitringa, De Synagoga Vetere; Holzinger, ZAW; Sch?rer, History of the Jewish People in the Time of Jesus Christ, II; Driver, Introduction to the Literature of the Old Testament; Thayer, New Testament Lexicon, and Cremer, Biblical Theol. Lexicon, under the word, ?ekklēsia? and ?sunagōgē?; Neumann, Rom. Staat und die all-gemeine Kirche; Ramsay, Church in the Roman Empire.; Lightfoot, ?The Christian Ministry,? in Commentary on Philippians; Harvey, The Church; Dagg, Church Order; Hovey, Religion and the State; Owen, Church Government; Ladd, Principles of Church Polity; Dexter, Congregationalism; Hodge, Discussions in Church Polity; Abbey, Ecclesiastical Constitutions; Hooker, Ecclesiastical Polity; Jacob, Ecclesiastical Polity; Bore, The Church and Its Ministry; Dollinger, The Church and The Churches; Stanley, Lectures on the Eastern Church; Dargan, Ecclesiology.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
PRINTER 1915.

FACEBOOK

Participe de nossa rede facebook.com/osreformadoresdasaude

Novidades, e respostas das perguntas de nossos colaboradores